delete-variable

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively communicates critical behavioral traits: the irreversible nature ('This action cannot be undone'), licensing requirements, and input formatting constraints ('Arguments must be provided as compact, single-line JSON without whitespace or newlines'). However, it doesn't mention potential error conditions or response format.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core purpose. Each sentence adds distinct value: the action, licensing requirements, usage guidance, irreversible nature, and input formatting. While efficient, the formatting instruction could be slightly more concise.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides substantial context: licensing requirements, irreversible nature, usage sequencing with sibling tools, and input formatting. The main gap is the lack of information about what happens after deletion or potential error responses.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description adds some semantic context by explaining that the 'id' parameter should come from 'list-variables'. However, it doesn't explain what 'clientId' represents or provide any details about parameter formats or constraints beyond the JSON formatting requirement.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the specific action ('Delete') and resource ('a variable by ID'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'create-variable' and 'list-variables'. It uses precise language that leaves no ambiguity about what the tool does.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly provides when to use this tool ('Use after list-variables to get the ID of the variable to delete') and mentions prerequisites ('Requires n8n Enterprise license with variable management features enabled'). It also distinguishes from alternatives by referencing the sibling tool 'list-variables' for obtaining IDs.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.